Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!topaz.rutgers.edu!ron From: ron@topaz.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie) Newsgroups: comp.emacs Subject: Re: mega-flame on GNU & Unipress Message-ID: Date: 4 May 88 15:26:26 GMT References: <8804300706.AA08462@EDDIE.MIT.EDU> I understand your questions, but i don't feel they're in any way warrented. <293@cullsj.UUCP> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 18 Excuse me? You asked for information on how to Unipress did something so you could put it into GNU and they wouldn't tell you? Not suprising. This doesn't quite support your claim that they don't want you to enhance it. Unipress has one of the most liberal licensing policies of a commercial software company I've ever seen. Source is available at prevailing rates and many customer contributed codes and gripes have been reintegrated with the released codes. To address you specifially, I've worked with the Unipress source and as near as I know there is no DECNET support in it at all, so it is extremely unlikely that they had an answer for you on the grounds that they did not know what you were talking about. Thirdly, if you wish to contact them about technical issues on their products, rather than having braindamaged support questions ("The README program doesn't work!"), you might try sending the developers email (...!unipress!emacs). -Ron